# Is there any recourse for dubious modding? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [March 4, 2010, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248 "2010-03-04T05:46:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/61 "2010-03-08T01:52:59Z")
I apologize for the delay in returning here. For most of the last year and for the foreseeable future, I spend most of my time in the hospital caring for family members and/or being treated myself and so I find it very difficult to participate here in a timely fashion. This post is in regards to my complaint about Marley’s reading comprehension levels. First, a note: There should be a forum in which we can discuss moderation and mods’ decisions where just mods and admins can participate. Doing this kind of thing in an open thread is largely – if not primarily – a siren call for conformists and authoritarians to abuse people who have grievances with authority. One not only has to challenge authority, one has to get past all the people who love authority and will punish non-conformists. There has to be a better way. [/soap box] Okay, here’s the deal with Marley. I wrote an angry retort to **orcenio** in the EP thread that I _ **knew** _ merited a warning. The warning, from Marley, was entirely justified and I never imagined anything different, _and I told him that many times_. I even concluded that post by admitting that I _ **knew** _ I had crossed the line and that I offered no excuse because I _ **knew** _ there _was_ no excuse. Instead, what I objected to was that Marley – throughout more than 10 PMs – kept accusing me of a significant moral offense: **He kept accusing me of trying to cheat and weasel my way _out_ of that warning.** In my first PM, I told him that while the warning was fully justified, I found his continuing accusations of weaseling and cheating to be insulting and that I was offended by it. Now, I could have phrased the end note more on that post more clearly. When I wrote there that I didn’t _need_ a warning, I meant that I didn’t _need_ a warning to tell me I had crossed far over the line because I had just admitted that. And when the warning came, I wrote over and over that I fully deserved it and that I had no complaint about the warning itself whatsoever. However, he kept accusing me of trying to cheat and weasel, which is grossly unfair and insulting and offensive and is a moral approbation that I did NOT merit. I would have let it lie after the first PM, but Marley kept PMing me to tell me that he didn’t understand why I was offended. I then explained again, whereupon Marley kept PMing me to tell me that he didn’t understand why I was offended. **But he absolutely could _not_ comprehend what I was saying** , as witnessed by each and every PM he sent me. He kept sending me PMs saying he didn’t understand why I was offended, but that I shouldn’t have tried to weasel and cheat my way out of that warning! Over and over again, he wrote comments such as “I don’t know what you find offensive”. His reading comprehension was simply awful. He was locked in a kind of apparently never-ending loop. Here’s how I summarized it in a PM: > [@ambushed](#): > > You say you “understood [my] entire post the first time and every subsequent time”. However, that simply isn’t true! Every single time, your reply demonstrated beyond any doubt that you did NOT understand me. And this last time, too. You clearly have not understood me at all yet. He also insulted me by telling me that my posts weren’t “important.” Since when is it a moderator’s job to assign value judgments of what _is_, and what is _not_, important? Telling me what I was trying to say “isn’t important” is an insult in itself. If a rule was enforced that one could only write “important” things, who and how would that value judgment be made? So, when I asked if there was any recourse in my OP, I wasn’t asking for Marley to be reassigned. I was _asking_ for ideas, not _ordering_ changes. One idea floating in my head was that Marley might voluntarily recuse himself from future moderation of my posts in GD. But as I think on that possibility now, I can see how unworkable and patently absurd that would be in both concept and practice, for it would be akin to special pleading and favoritism and pose all kinds of ludicrous complications, so I withdraw all of that. But the larger issue remains: Punishments can be severe (though _again_, I admit I deserved the warning in question). As such, if you can’t make a mod understand such a ever-so-slightly subtle distinction as being offended _not_ by the warning but by the moral insults accompanying it – even in ten back and forth PMs – how much confidence can we have that a mod is sufficiently capable of making the kind of subtle distinctions and judgments that the job calls for? (And I expect to pay still more for my presumption in even posting this and my OP). ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/62 "2010-03-08T02:20:35Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Piffle. > > Noting that a comment appears to be racist or even noting that a post appeared to be infantile falls within the realm of attacking the post, not the poster. Yes, I entirely agree. That’s my point! > [@tomndebb](#): > > Go back and read the post to which I responded. You did not merely make a comment and then explain it, you went on, at length, across multiple paragraphs, repeatedly making derogatory comments throughout your post. I think you haven’t taken sufficient account of the full context. For example, what’s up with your concentrating on length in this context? I couldn’t get _you_ to go back and re-read it, could I? > [@Why does evolutionary psychology get such a bum rap?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-evolutionary-psychology-get-such-a-bum-rap/524521/104): > > … I genuinely apologize for personalizing my remarks in reply to your posts in this thread… > > I will not make the rule-violating mistake of criticizing you personally here again. What you will see here is not criticism of you, but of your views… > > … The view of science and what science _is_ and what scientists _do_ you keep espousing is, in a word, **infantile**. **You** , on the other hand, are not infantile. He had bashed me in three posts and treated me very smarmily and condescendingly. In my anger, I failed in my responsibilities by attacking him personally, which definitely crossed the line. But in the follow-up post in question, I changed my ways. I offered a sincere apology for my personal insults. I told him I was going to criticize his views rather than him as a person. I went out of my way to tell him that while I found his views to be infantile, I did not find **him** to be infantile. I put it to you that that your assertion that I crossed the line is unjust. The rule about crossing the line by attacking the person in the guise of attacking the view is not violated when the poster goes out of his way to apologize for the previous approach and **explicitly state** that the _poster_ does not merit the criticism I feel his _views_ deserve. I am not concerned about this particular incident. I _am_ concerned that you appear to be redefining the rules for the future. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/63 "2010-03-08T02:23:56Z")
> [@Crotalus](#): > > \*\*ambushed \*\*and **not\_alice** , has the concept of just shrugging off minor slights ever occurred to you? It has amazing benefits for the shrugger and others. And if you feel an urge right now to protest that these are not minor issues, try to suppress that urge. You’re wrong. These are very minor issues. > > Compare your troubles to **FinnAgain**. **Marley** turned him into a newt, a pretty nasty thing to do. But \*\*Finn \*\*just shrugged it off. And you know what happened? He got better. **Crotalus** , one fact you’re missing is that I _tried_ to end it after one PM. But Marley kept PMing _me_ telling me he didn’t understand why I was offended by his accusation of trying to cheat and weasel. I replied with a new attempt at explaining it, then he sent me _another_ PM telling me he didn’t understand why I was offended! This happened ten times before I begged him to stop PM’ing me. ---
**Author:** ![Sapo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/64 "2010-03-08T02:30:04Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > **Crotalus** , one fact you’re missing is that I _tried_ to end it after one PM. But Marley kept PMing _me_ telling me he didn’t understand why I was offended by his accusation of trying to cheat and weasel. I replied with a new attempt at explaining it, then he sent me _another_ PM telling me he didn’t understand why I was offended! This happened ten times before I begged him to stop PM’ing me. Did you try not responding to his PMs? I am particularly bad IRL at wriggling free of undesirable conversations but even I manage to not answer and even the worst bores stop talking when you stop responding. If he continued to PM you when you didn’t answer his previous ones, then I might take your flag but if you were just trying to get the last word, don’t be surprised if your counterpart plays the same game. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/65 "2010-03-08T03:50:41Z")
**Zoe** said: > [@](#): > > Is it _possible_ that both mods and mundane posters **project** a tone onto what they are reading – a tone that was not intended at all? Pot. Kettle. I would say not only possible, but likely. **ambushed** said: > [@](#): > > First, a note: There should be a forum in which we can discuss moderation and mods’ decisions where just mods and admins can participate. Doing this kind of thing in an open thread is largely – if not primarily – a siren call for conformists and authoritarians to abuse people who have grievances with authority. One not only has to challenge authority, one has to get past all the people who love authority and will punish non-conformists. I’m much more concerned about the posters who take any complaint as a chance to make it their complaint, and drag in any other beefs they have. We can’t have a conversation about some issue without certain other people popping in with “the moderators suck” or else dredging up their past issues again. Just read this thread for examples of both. > [@](#): > > He had bashed me in three posts and treated me very smarmily and condescendingly. In my anger, I failed in my responsibilities by attacking him personally, which definitely crossed the line. But in the follow-up post in question, I changed my ways. I offered a sincere apology for my personal insults. I told him I was going to criticize his views rather than him as a person. I went out of my way to tell him that while I found his views to be infantile, I did not find **him** to be infantile. > > I put it to you that that your assertion that I crossed the line is unjust. The rule about crossing the line by attacking the person in the guise of attacking the view is not violated when the poster goes out of his way to apologize for the previous approach and **explicitly state** that the _poster_ does not merit the criticism I feel his _views_ deserve. With respect, the section you quoted does not come off as a sincere apology and attempt to aim at the views rather than the poster, it comes off as: “I’m not calling you an idiot, I’m saying that your views are the views of an idiot. See, that’s not an insult about you, but about your views.” In other words, you are seeking to squeeze in the words “infantile” as much as possible in a way you can _claim_ is directed at the views and not the poster. By harping on the point, you just make it seem like you are trying to skirt the “no insults” rule. If you’re really sincere, stop trying to characterize the views and start addressing _how_ they are lacking. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/66 "2010-03-08T04:11:17Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > Instead, what I objected to was that Marley – throughout more than 10 PMs – kept accusing me of a significant moral offense: **He kept accusing me of trying to cheat and weasel my way _out_ of that warning.** Because you said it was not necessary to warn you when in fact it was. > [@](#): > > In my first PM, I told him that while the warning was fully justified, I found his continuing accusations of weaseling and cheating to be insulting and that I was offended by it. _I repeatedly apologized for hurting your feelings._ I repeatedly tried to move the conversation past that issue and bring it to a conclusion. You would not allow me to do that. > [@](#): > > When I wrote there that I didn’t _need_ a warning, I meant that I didn’t _need_ a warning to tell me I had crossed far over the line because I had just admitted that. I dropped this as soon as you said you misspoke, and if you’d phrased it better in the first place I never would have brought it up. > [@](#): > > However, he kept accusing me of trying to cheat and weasel This is not true. I said, one time, that “You don’t get brownie points for admitting you know what the rules are and then breaking them anyway. But I appreciate it if you’re planning to stay inside the lines in the future.” I did not repeat this. > [@](#): > > I would have let it lie after the first PM, but Marley kept PMing me to tell me that he didn’t understand why I was offended. This is not true either. At one point you left the boards for a week and then resumed the conversation again! How can you accuse me of pestering you in that situation? > [@](#): > > He kept sending me PMs saying he didn’t understand why I was offended, but that I shouldn’t have tried to weasel and cheat my way out of that warning! I dropped this issue after maybe the second PM. > [@](#): > > Over and over again, he wrote comments such as “I don’t know what you find offensive”. I believe I said this twice. And one of those two times, I was saying I did not understand why you flew off the handle at **orcenio** ’s post. > [@](#): > > He was locked in a kind of apparently never-ending loop. The implication that I “would not stop PMing you” is ridiculous. _I responded to your messages to me, that’s all._ And I repeatedly tried to bring our conversation to a close, since we were both repeating ourselves and it was tiresome. You wouldn’t get off your high horse and move on. For example, I said: “Since we are in agreement that the statement deserved a warning, and since we agree that there won’t be any further problems if you don’t do this again, I don’t think there is anything left to discuss.” and “I don’t know what you think we still have to discuss. I’ve repeatedly stressed the points we agree on (which are all the important ones) and tried to move past the other stuff, but you are refusing to let it go.” But you had to keep disputing one minor point or another. > [@](#): > > He also insulted me by telling me that my posts weren’t “important.” That’s not what I said. I said you overreacted to **orcenio** and that you blew the issue out of proportion. And I stand by that because it’s true. My exact words were “you’ve written thousands of words about something that was neither important nor complicated in the first place.” From your “hillbilly” insults to your Pitting of **orcenio** to your tone in our PMs and in this thread, you have overreacted to a ludicrous extent. > [@](#): > > As such, if you can’t make a mod understand such a ever-so-slightly subtle distinction as being offended _not_ by the warning but by the moral insults accompanying it – even in ten back and forth PMs – how much confidence can we have that a mod is sufficiently capable of making the kind of subtle distinctions and judgments that the job calls for? The bottom line is this: you acted like a jerk, and you appeared to be asking for special treatment. I dropped the “I don’t need a warning” issue after you acknowledged your miscommunication. > [@](#): > > And I expect to pay still more for my presumption in even posting this and my OP). You’ve paid no price at all. > [@ambushed](#): > > **Crotalus** , one fact you’re missing is that I _tried_ to end it after one PM. But Marley kept PMing _me_ telling me he didn’t understand why I was offended by his accusation of trying to cheat and weasel. I replied with a new attempt at explaining it, then he sent me _another_ PM telling me he didn’t understand why I was offended! This happened ten times before I begged him to stop PM’ing me. This is pure bullshit. You were not willing to end it after one PM. You said you were offended I did not acknowledge your ‘I know Tom or other mod’ note and demanded an explanation and an apology for “your flagrantly unequal and thus unjust treatment to me?” ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/67 "2010-03-08T13:40:50Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > **Crotalus** , one fact you’re missing is that I _tried_ to end it after one PM. But Marley kept PMing _me_ telling me he didn’t understand why I was offended by his accusation of trying to cheat and weasel. I replied with a new attempt at explaining it, then he sent me _another_ PM telling me he didn’t understand why I was offended! This happened ten times before I begged him to stop PM’ing me. **ambushed** , ending a discussion is a process over which you have unilateral control. Stop opening the PMs, stop answering the PMs, and stop thinking about it. It is interesting to me that you frequently attribute disagreement with your positions with “missing” something, or to reading comprehension issues. You should consider the possibility that most of the people reading your posts understand what you are saying, and disagree with you anyway. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/68 "2010-03-08T14:20:20Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > I think you haven’t taken sufficient account of the full context. For example, what’s up with your concentrating on length in this context? Obviously, you are just missing the point. No purpose in continuing this discussionl. ---
**Author:** ![Sparky812](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Sparky812](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparky812)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2010, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/69 "2010-03-10T12:50:31Z")
\*\* ambushed,\*\* anyone ever tell you you talk too much? It appears your own “reading comprehension” is impaired or inadequate. > [@](#): > > It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. - Mark Twain ---
**Author:** ![orcenio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/orcenio/32/1036_2.png) [@orcenio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/orcenio)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2010, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/70 "2010-03-10T13:43:41Z")
> [@ambushed](#): > > He had bashed me in three posts and treated me very smarmily and condescendingly. **SmellMyWort** sums our [exchange very elegantly](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=12152729&postcount=126) in that pit thread you opened up about me (Remember it? The thread, to which you refuse to contribute/engage anyone, titled “_Your toothless, 61-times pregnant sister-momma slurps it from Army boots, orcenio_.” There are many unanswered posts still just waiting for you. > [@](#): > > In my anger, I failed in my responsibilities by attacking him personally, which definitely crossed the line. But in the follow-up post in question, I changed my ways. **I offered a sincere apology** [bolding mine] for my personal insults. I told him I was going to criticize his views rather than him as a person. I went out of my way to tell him that while I found his views to be infantile, I did not find **him** to be infantile. I rejected the sincerity of your dubious apology for reasons clearly outlined by **Irishman** / **Marley23** / **tomndebb** in this thread and [the GD one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=12147080&postcount=105). Ya know what. Instead of discussing this here, why don’t you come back to [that pit thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=552832&page=4) you started. I, also, can be a little more free in my own posts. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2010, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248/71 "2010-03-10T15:52:30Z")
I just read the first couple pages of the Pit thread. HOLY CRAP! **ambushed** , in light of all you posted there and your summary of what you think the exchange was, I can only say that 1. you were _ **WAY** _ overreacting to orcenio in the first thread; 2. taking the whole context (as you keep reminding everyone to do), it is thoroughly unbelievable that you were sincere in any kind of apology to **orcenio** , or for your behavior in the original thread. Ergo, your repititious description of **orcenio** ’s posts as “infantile” just reeks that much more of trying to skirt the “no insults to posters” rule. 3. I didn’t take **orcenio** ’s use of “philosophy majors” to mean you were an idiot, but rather a pretentious blowhard. So your entire string of rants about **orcenio** insulting you are based on misinterpreting the “insult” he was giving you. 4. after what I’ve read of the above exchanges, I am thoroughly convinced that it is not **Marley23** that has the reading comprehension problem. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-recourse-for-dubious-modding/531248.md?page=3)